Michael Georgie Carson v. Michigan

ISSUE 1 DOES THE MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT'S DECISION CONFLICT WITH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT'S CASELAW, WHEN THEY OVERTURNED THE MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS FINDING THAT HELD; "...THE DEFENDANT WAS DENIED HIS SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHERE, DEFENSE COUNSEL FAILED TO.. FILE A PRE-TRIAL MOTION TO SUPRESS THE CONTENTS OF THE CELL PHONE, WHERE THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS DEFECTIVE BECAUSE THE 'PARTICULARITY' REQUIREMENTS OF THE WARRANT WAS OVERBROAD AND FAILED TO PROVIDE PROBABLE CAUSE FOR EACH OF THE PHONE CONTENTS SOUGHT TO BE ADMITTED AT TRIAL, AND THEREBY VIOLATED THE FOURTH AMENDMENT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION". THE DEFENDANT SAYS: "YES" THE STATE SAID: "NO"